The Frist Center for the Visual Arts’ March 2 to June 3, 2007 Matisse, Picasso, and the School of Paris: Masterpieces from The Baltimore Museum of Art exhibit contained six non-disclosed -fakes- falsely attributed as original works of visual art ie., sculptures, all with counterfeit signatures posthumously applied.

On page 617 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -fake- is defined as: “Something that is not what it purports to be.”[FN 2]

WHAT SIX IN THIS EXHIBIT ARE NON-DISCLOSED FAKES?

Those six non-disclosed -fakes-, in this exhibit, were falsely attributed as: Gaston Lachaise’s 1) Standing Woman (Elevation), Aristide Maillol’s 2) Torso of Summer, Auguste Rodin’s 3) Balzac, Edgar Degas’ 4) Little Dancer, Aged Fourteen, 5) Dancer Looking at the Sole of her Right Foot and 6) Fourth Position Front, on the Left Leg.

This monograph will document that by definition, rule of law and laws of nature, the dead don’t create sculpture, much less sign and/or number them.

2. Aristide Maillol [d 1944] was dead when Torso of Summer was cast in bronze before -1960-[FN 4] with a counterfeit “Aristide Maillol N2” inscription applied up to 16 years after Aristide Maillol’s death.

3. Auguste Rodin [d 1917] was dead when Balzac was cast in bronze in -1957-[FN 5]with counterfeit “A Rodin” inscriptions posthumously applied and authorized by the Musee Rodin who violates Auguste Rodin’s 1916 Will by not casting “from the objects given by him.”

4. Edgar Degas [d 1917] was dead when Little Dancer, Aged Fourteen was cast in bronze[FN 6], much less brass. Since Degas' mixed-media sculpture were not made exclusively in wax for lost-wax casting, it was the foundry workers' posthumous wax reproductions that were used for casting.

5. Edgar Degas [d 1917] was dead when Dancer, Looking at the Sole of her Right Foot was cast in bronze, much less brass. The two to three-generations-removed bronzes, much less brass, from foundry workers’ posthumous wax reproductions had their fingerprints, not Degas', in them.[FN 7]

6. Edgar Degas [d 1917] never signed his original mixed-media sculptures. Yet, the second to third-generation-removed posthumous bronzes, much less brass, cast from the foundry workers posthumous wax reproductions, all have posthumously applied counterfeit “Degas” inscriptions[FN 8].

UPDATE: All bronzes, falsely attributed to a dead Edgar Degas, may actually be
made of brass according to the National Gallery of Art’s published 2010 Edgar Degas Sculpture catalogue. “Brass is the term used for alloys of copper and zinc in a solid
solution. Typically it is more than 50% copper and from 5 to 20% zinc,
in comparison to bronze which is principally an alloy of copper and
tin.” This metallurgical discovery is confirmed on page 26 of the National Gallery of Art’s published 2010 Edgar Degas Sculptures
catalogue, in the “Degas’ Bronzes Analyzed” essay by Shelly G. Sturman
and Daphne S. Barbour. In part, the authors wrote: “Analysis of the
elemental surface composition of the National Gallery sculptures was
performed using X R F, a noninvasive technique. An alloy of copper and
zinc with low to medium tin and traces of lead was used to cast all the
sculptures. Results were also compared to X R F analysis undertaken at
the Norton Simon Museum on the bronze modeles and at the Metropolitan
Museum of Art on some of the serial A set as well. - Bronze is a
misnomer for these sculptures, because they are all cast from brass
(copper and zince with tin). But as they are universally referred to as
“Degas bronzes,” we will continue to use that term in a nontechnical
sense throughout this discussion.” On page 1015 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -misnomer- is defined as: “A mistake in naming a person, place of thing, esp. in a legal instrument.” Unfortunately, the National Gallery of Art, Shelly G. Sturman and Daphne
S. Barbour have a plethora of misnomers throughout their essay, not to
mention the entire catalogue, one of which is the constant referral to
posthumous bronzes, much less in brass attributed to Edgar Degas, as
“sculpture.”

For the upcoming Matisse, Picasso and the School of Paris: Masterpieces from the Baltimore Museum of Art exhibit, the Frist Center for the Visual Arts’ website makes the following written -representation- that the exhibit consist of: “64 paintings, sculptures and works on paper from The Baltimore Museum of Art’s extensive collection, this rich exhibition presents a survey of the ground-breaking movements in art—including Impressionism, Post-Impressionism, Fauvism, Cubism, Expressionism and Surrealism—that made Paris the center of modern art and culture from the late 19th century to the outbreak of the World War II.”[FN 9]

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW & DEFINITIONSWHAT IS MEANT BY REPRESENTATION?

On page 1303 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -representation- is defined as: “A presentation of fact - either by words or by conduct - made to induce someone to act, esp to enter into a contract.”[FN 10]

How can one tell if these Frist Center for the Visual Arts’ six so-called “sculptures,” in question, are really “a survey of the ground breaking movements in art - from the late 19th century to the outbreak of the Second World War?”

The first step is to independently document the definition of key terms being used, so everyone may all speak and understand the same language.

WHAT IS A SCULPTURE?

On page 372 in Ralph Mayer’s HarperCollins Dictionary of Art Terms & Techniques, -sculpture- is defined as: “The creation of three dimensional forms by carving, modeling or assembly. In carving, the sculptor removes unwanted material.... In modeling on the other hand, the sculptor creates a form by building it up...”[FN 11]

WHAT IS A SCULPTOR?

This is answered in the J. Paul Getty Trust’s website. Under their Getty Vocabulary Program, -sculptor- is defined as: “Artists who specialize in creating images and forms that are carried out primarily in three dimensions, generally in the media of stone, wood, or metal.”[FN 12]

The prior independent documented definitions are reaffirmed by U.S. Copyright Law.

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW - WORK OF VISUAL ART

Under U.S. Copyright Law 101. Definitions, a "work of visual art” ie., -sculpture- is defined as: “multiple cast, carved, or fabricated sculptures of 200 or fewer that are consecutively numbered by the author and bear the signature or other identifying mark of the author.”[FN 13]

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW - RIGHTS OF ATTRIBUTION

Furthermore, under U.S. Copyright Law 106A. Rights of Attribution - “shall not apply to any reproduction.”[FN 14]

WHAT IS A REPRODUCTION?

On page 350 in Ralph Mayer’s HarperCollins Dictionary of Art Terms & Techniques, -reproduction- is defined as: “A general term for any copy, likeness, or counterpart of an original work of art or of a photograph, done in the same medium as the original or in another, and done by someone other than the creator of the original.”[FN 15]

Since Auguste Rodin and Edgar Degas died in 1917, Gaston Lachaise in 1935 and Aristide Maillol in 1944, obviously anything posthumously reproduced would be, at best by definition and under U.S. Copyright Law, a -reproduction-.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

The Frist Center for the Visual Arts, accepting this exhibit, and the Baltimore Museum of Arts, lending this exhibit, are located in the States of Tenessee and Maryland respectively, which are obviously in the United States of America.

Therefore, these museums would be legally bound by U.S. Copyright Law, not to mention local, state and federal statutes.

SCULPTURES OR CASTS?

Now using the prior documented definitions and U.S. Copyright Law, compare the Frist Center for the Visual Arts’ -representation- that these six objects are “sculptures” to the -disclosure- by the Frist Center for the Visual Arts on their website: “Edgar Degas, Little Dancer, Aged Fourteen (original model 1881; this cast 1919-1921).”[FN 16]

WHAT IS MEANT BY DISCLOSURE?

On page 476 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -disclosure- is defined as: “The act or process of making known something that was previously unknown.”[FN 17]

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF CAST?

On page 70 of Ralph Mayer’s The HarperCollins Dictionary of Art Terms & Techniques, -cast- is defined as: “to reproduce an object, such as a piece of sculpture, by means of a MOLD.”[FN 18]

A sculpture, as documented earlier, is created by a -sculptor-, a cast would be a -reproduction-, particularly since it was reproduced ie., -cast- posthumously after Edgar Degas’ death in 1917.

Therefore, the Frist Center for the Visual Art’s -representation- of the Little Dancer, Aged Fourteen as a "sculpture” does not match the true -disclosure- that it was actually, at best, a -reproduction-. To commingle the terms sculpture and cast, as if they were the same thing, would be, at best, a -non-sequitur-.

WHAT IS A NON-SEQUITUR?

On page 1080 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -non-sequitur- is defined as: “An inference or conclusion that does not logically follow from the premises.”[FN 19]

In other words, by definition and under U.S. Copyright Law, you cannot call a reproduction a “visual work of art” ie., -sculpture-, much less attribute that reproduction to that artist whether they are alive or dead. Without full and honest disclosure to reproductions as reproductions by all museums, how can the consumer give informed consent before they chose to attend an exhibit whether they pay admission or not?

WHAT IS (INFORMED) CONSENT?

On page 300 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -consent- is defined as an: “agreement, approval or permission as to some act or purpose, esp. given voluntarily by a competent person.”[FN 20]

BALTIMORE MUSEUM OF ART’S REPRESENTATION

The Baltimore Museum of Art’s makes the -representation-, in an July 26, 2006 email from Baltimore Museum of Art’s Public Relations Director Anne Mannix to this scholar that the “Cone collection is comprised of more than 3,000 items that the Cone Sisters acquired between 1898 and 1949-including 161 paintings, 79 sculptures, 6895 prints, and 398 drawings, as well as illustrated books, textiles, furniture, and the sisters’ personal library and archives.”[FN 21]

Now lets’ compare Baltimore Museum of Art’s -representation- of “sculptures” in their Cone collection and particularly the -representation- in the Picasso, Matisse and the School of Paris, Masterpieces from The Baltimore Museum of Art’s exhibition checklist to the actually true -disclosure-.

In the original Baltimore Museum of Art’s 2004 exhibition checklist, the Gaston Lachaise Standing Woman (Elevation) was listed with the “1927”[FN 22] date with no reason to suspect otherwise. In subsequent requested and received expanded checklist (above), from the Baltimore Museum of Art, there were two red flags that raised suspicion that not all was right.

Second and more subtle -red flag- was the description given in the “Provenance.” It stated: “Purchased by Alan Janet Wurtzburger 1957 from Trustees of Lachaise Estate through Martha Dickinson, Weyhe Gallery, New York.”

WHAT IS MEANT BY PROVENANCE?On page 335 in Ralph Mayer’s HarperCollins Dictionary of Art Terms & Techniques, -provenance- is defined as: “the record of ownership for a work of art, ideally from the time it left the artist’s studio to its present location.”[FN 25]

The obvious question is why does the -provenance- for this Gaston Lachaise Standing Woman (Elevation) only extend back to the Trustees of Lachaise Estate in 1957 some twenty-two years after Gaston Lachaise’s death in 1935?

GASTON LACHAISE’S WIDOW DIED IN 1957

That question may be answered, in part, in Gerald Nordland’s 1974 published -monograph- Gaston Lachaise: The Man and His Work. On page 173, in his Epilogue, the author wrote: “Isabel Dutaud Nagle Lachaise, the artist’s widow lived until 1957, twenty-two years after his death. - At her death the control of the artist’s work passed through her estate to the Lachaise Foundation, under the Trusteeship of her great-nephew, John b. Pierce Jr., of Boston.”[FN 26]

LACHAISE FOUNDATION

Additionally on page 173, in his Epilogue, the author Gerald Nordland wrote: “Under Pierce’s watchful management casts have been made from existing plaster originals made by the artist. A limitation on the total number of bronze casts of any one sculpture has been set by the Foundation. Editions range from six to twelve bronze casts, the total number of each edition having been established to take account of bronze casts known to the Foundation to have been made prior to its organization. All casts made by the Foundation bear the stamp and are numbered consecutively according to the size of its limited Foundation edition. After all casts of the edition have been made, the molds are destroyed and the plaster retained or disposed of by the Foundation in a manner designed to safeguard against further casting either by destruction of the plaster or by sale or donation, with appropriate restrictions against further castings, to an established museum of other responsible institution. All Lachaise Estate bronzes have been cast at The Modern Art Foundry, 18-70 Forty-first Street, Long Island City, New York, under the supervision of Robert Spring, Proprietor, and Robert Schoelkopf, the New York art dealer.”[FN 27]

So, is the Baltimore Museum of Art’s so-called Gaston Lachaise Standing Woman (Elevation) a lifetime cast as promoted by the museum with its’ “1927” inscribed date or is it a posthumous reproduction authorized by Isabel Dutaud Nagle Lachaise, the artist’s widow, or the subsequent 1957 or later Lachaise Foundation?

FOUR LIFETIME CASTS

This is answered in a 2001 GASTON LACHAISECatalogue essay written by Gerald Nordland for the Hackett-Freedman Gallery. In this essay, the author wrote: “The four lifetime casts of Elevation (Standing Woman, 1912–1927) are owned by: the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, Buffalo, NY; the Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, IL; the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY; and the St. Louis Art Museum, St. Louise, MO.”[FN 28]

The Baltimore Museum of Art’s so-called Gaston Lachaise’s Standing Woman (Elevation) is not one of the four listed lifetime casts.

VIRGINIA MUSEUM

This is further confirmed by Gerald Nordland’s in his “LACHAISE’S 20TH-CENTURY WOMAN” article published by the Virginia Museum in their Volume Twenty, Number Three Spring 1980 Arts in Virginia publication.

On page 21 of Gerald Nordland’s article, four lifetime casts are additionally documented when the author wrote: “Twelve casts of Elevation are in existence. No more will be made. Four were cast in the artist’s lifetime: they are in Buffalo at the Albright-Knox Art Gallery; in Chicago at the Art Institute of Chicago; in Worcester, Massachusetts, in the Dial Collection of the Worcester Art Museum; and at the St. Louis Art Museum.”[FN 29]

FOUR POSTHUMOUS CASTS AUTHORIZED BY HIS WIDOW

After Gaston Lachaise’s death, on page 21, the author wrote: “Four casts [Elevation] were authorized by his widow in the late thirties, after the artist’s death in October 1935. These are located at the Philadelphia Museum of Art, the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York; the Baltimore Museum of Art (a recent gift from the Wurtzburger Estate); and the Virginia Museum. The Virginia Museum’s cast was first held by William Zeckendorf, who, at the urging of I.M.Pei, ordered it for the terrace outside his Manhatten office penthouse. The piece was sold in the mid 1970’s to Ben Dean of Newport Harbor, California, and was subsequently sold to the Virginia Museum through Robert Schoelkopf of New York."[FN 30]

FOUR POSTHUMOUS CASTS AUTHORIZED BY THE LACHAISE FOUNDATION

As for the posthumous casts authorized after the death of Gaston Lachaise’s widow in 1957, on page 21, the author wrote: “The Lachaise Estate and the Lachaise Foundation have authorized four additional casts to be made in the years since the establishment of the Foundation, in the fifties, bringing the edition to a maximum of twelve. The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, Sarasota, Florida, has 1/4, and two casts are in private hands; 2/4 is held by Gardner Cowles in New York and 3/4 is part of the estate of Nelson Rockfeller, New York. The Lachaise Foundation holds 4/4 for loan purposes.”[FN 31]

Additionally, in a September 18, 2004 telephone conversation with the author Gerald Nordland, he confirmed that the Baltimore Museum of Art’s Standing Woman (Elevation) was “cast well after World War II”[FN 32] and that the so-called “G Lachaise” signatures were posthumously inscribed into these posthumous reproduced bronzes since Gaston Lachaise’s original plaster was not signed.

Therefore, by definition and law, anything posthumously reproduced would, at best, be a reproduction and not a sculpture and any posthumous application of Gaston Lachaise’s name to these posthumously reproduced objects would be “counterfeit.”

BALTIMORE MUSEUM OF ART CONFESSES

On November 15, 2004 the Raleigh, North Carolina’s News Observer newspaper published a “Lesson in Bronze” article by Craig Jarvis. In part, the reporter wrote: “Jay Fisher, deputy director of curatorial affairs at the Baltimore museum, said the museum will update records to reflect the history of the Lachaise sculpture in the show - “Standing Woman (Elevation)” -- thanks to Arseneau’s research. But he defended the authenticity of the piece and said all the works accurately represent the artist’s intentions. Like all museums, we accept them as legitimate works of art,” Fisher said in an e-mail message. “What we are responsible for is disclosing the full story about them to the best of our ability.”[FN 33]

ASSOCIATION OF ART MUSEUM DIRECTORS MEMBER

The Baltimore Museum of Art is a current member of the Association of Art Museum Directors. As a member of the Association of Art Museum Directors, they endorse the College Art Association’s ethical guidelines on “sculptural reproductions.” In part, it states: “all transfers into new materials, unless specifically condoned by the artist - should be considered as inauthentic or counterfeit - such works should not be acquired by museums or exhibited as works of art.”[FN 34]

INAUTHENTIC OR COUNTERFEIT

In other words, the Baltimore Museum of Art may now acknowledged the posthumous date of casting for this so-called “Gaston Lachaise” but under their own endorsed ethical guidelines it will always be -counterfeit-.

The Baltimore Museum of Art makes the -representation-, in their original checklist for this exhibit, that they have an Aristide Maillol’s Torso of Summer with a “1910-1911” date that predates the artist’s 1944 death by some thirty-three years.

TORSO OF SUMMER, CAST BEFORE 1960

The only problem is that further -disclosure-, requested and received from the Baltimore Museum of Art, documents that the so-called Aristide Maillol’s Torso of Summer was actually reproduced ie., “cast before 1960” as much as sixteen years after the artist’s death.

Since Aristide Maillol was dead when the so-called Torso of Summer was reproduced ie., “cast” in bronze sometime before 1960, obviously he could not have inscribed “Aristide Maillol N2” to it or much less authorized its’ inscription.

Therefore, it is “something that is not what it purports to be”[FN 35] which is one legal definition of -fake-.

FRIST CENTER FOR THE VISUAL ART’S VISION & MISSION STATEMENTS

On the Frist Center for the Visual Art’s website, under the subtitle “ABOUT THE FRIST,” it states: “The vision of the Frist Center is to inspire people through art to look at their world in new ways. The mission of the Frist Center is to present and originate high quality exhibitions with related educational programs and community outreach activities.”[FN 36]

To first achieve these noble goals the Frist Center for the Visual Arts must give full and honest disclosure to these contentious issues of authenticity otherwise those who pay the price of admission can’t give informed consent.

Since, Auguste Rodin was dead in 1957, how did an so-called “A Rodin” inscription come to be applied to, at best, a posthumous reproduction?

POSTHUMOUS APPLICATION OF SO-CALLED RODIN SIGNATURES

The posthumous application of a so-called “A Rodin” inscription and/or signature to posthumously -cast- ie., reproduced bronzes is done by the Musee Rodin or by the foundries with the Musee Rodin’s approval.

On page 47 of this catalogue, it is written: “All work cast under commission by the Musee Rodin includes the following mandatory inscriptions: - Rodin’s signature.”[FN 38]

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF SIGNATURE?

Here are two independently documented definitions of -signature-. On the J. Paul Getty Trust’s website, under their Getty Vocabulary Program, -signature- is defined as: “Persons' names written in their own hand.”[FN 39]

Additionally, on page 1387 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -signature- is defined as: “A person’s name or mark written by that person or at the person’s direction.”[FN 40]

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF COUNTERFEIT?

On page 354 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -counterfeit- is defined as: “To forge, copy, or imitate (something) without a right to do so and with the purpose of deceiving or defrauding.”[FN 41]

Is the posthumous application of so-called “A Rodin” signatures to these posthumous fakes done “with the purpose of deceiving or defrauding?”

NOT FROM THE ORIGINAL PLASTERS

Aside posthumous application of counterfeit signatures to these posthumously -cast- ie., reproduced bronzes, the Musee Rodin acknowledges they do not even use Auguste Rodin’s original plasters for casting in bronze. The Musee Rodin curator Antoinette Romain wrote: “Consequently, whenever it is decided to release a new "subject", a copy is first made from the old mould which can be sent without risk to the foundry where it undergoes the necessary preparations for casting. It is coated with an unmoulding agent, usually in a dark colour, and cut, before being cast again. This practice not only ensures absolute fidelity to the original but also preserves the old plasters which are obviously more valuable since they were made during the lifetime of Rodin.”[FN 42]

In other words, by avoiding sending the hypothetical original plasters to the foundry, they have willingly given up the authentic original surface details made by the working fingers of Rodin himself or that Rodin approved through his collaboration with his “sculpteur reproducteur habituel”[FN 43] Henri Lebosse. Each time the surface of one of these subjects is approximated by the necessary crude handling of the materials used in the reproduction processes, there is visible change. The resulting pieces may be interesting to look at, but it is an absurdity to pretend they are just the way Rodin would have wanted and intended for them to appear.

AUGUSTE RODIN’S WILL

On page 285 in the National Gallery of Art’s published 1981 Rodin Rediscovered exhibition catalogue, the former Musee Rodin curator Monique Laurent documents that in Auguste Rodin’s April 1, 1916 Will, he gave the “reproductions rights of those objects given by him”[FN 44] to the State of France upon his death.

Since the Musee Rodin acknowledges not reproducing in bronze directly from the “those objects given by him” ie., Auguste Rodin but instead use posthumously reproduced plasters, would the Musee Rodin be violating Auguste Rodin’s Will?

FRENCH LAW MANDATES DISCLOSURE OF REPRODUCTIONS

The March 3, 1981 French decree no. 81.255, Article 9, in part, states: "Article 9--All facsimiles, casts of casts, copies, or other reproductions of an original work of art as set out in Article 71 of Appendix III of the General Code of Taxes, executed after the date of effectiveness of the present decree, must carry in a visible and indelible manner the notation ‘Reproduction’.”[FN 45]

Unfortunately, there are quite a few in the museum industry who will defend and have defended this fraud of misrepresenting posthumous reproductions as “visual works of art” ie., -sculptures by making blanket statements that these posthumously reproduced objects, on exhibit in American museums, adhere to “French Law.” The United States of America is not a French province and French law clearly mandates the disclosure of reproductions as “reproductions.”

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW

Under U.S. Copyright Law 101. Definitions, a “work of visual art” is defined as: “in the case of a sculpture, in multiple cast, carved, or fabricated sculptures of 200 or fewer that are consecutively numbered by the author and bear the signature or other identifying mark of the author.”[FN 46]

ATTRIBUTION - SHALL NOT APPLY TO ANY REPRODUCTION

As documented earlier, under U.S. Copyright Law 106A. Rights of certain authors to attribution and integrity - “shall not apply to any reproduction.”[FN 47]

In other words, under U.S. Copyright Law, the dead cannot create a “work of visual art” and reproductions cannot be “attributed” to a living artist much less a dead one.

From “1919-1921” when this so-called Little Dancer, Aged Fourteen was cast in bronze, much less brass, Edgar Degas was -dead- anywhere from two to four years. Therefore, common sense and logic would tell anyone that Edgar Degas, being dead and has never seen this so-called “sculpture,” much less created it.

So, what is the real story behind all these so-called “Degas bronze sculptures?”

EDGAR DEGAS NEVER CAST HIS SCULPTURES IN BRONZE

On page 180 in the National Gallery of Art’s published 1998 Degas at the Races catalogue, in a “The Horse in Wax and Bronze” essay, the authors Daphne S. Barbour and Shelly G. Struman wrote: “Degas never cast his sculpture in bronze, claiming that it was a “tremendous responsibility to leave anything behind in bronze -- the medium is for eternity.”[FN 48]

DEGAS’ SCULPTURES COULD NOT BE CAST IN BRONZE

Furthermore, on page 180 of their essay, these authors Daphne S. Barbour and Shelly G. Struman wrote: “Not a single sculpture has been found to be made exclusively of wax, and none was intended to be sacrificed and melted during lost-wax casting.”[FN 49]

DEGAS’ SCULPTURES WERE POSTHUMOUSLY RECONSTRUCTED & ALTERED
On page 13 of the 2002 Degas Sculptures, Catalogue Raisonne of the Bronzes catalogue, the editor Joseph S. Czestochowski describes how Degas’ original sculptures were reconstructed and altered for casting in bronze. The author wrote that Edgar Degas’: “original wax and mixed-media sculptures were stabilized to varying degrees by other hands in preparation for the initial casting process. The most notable change was the elimination of the armatures that for Degas were an integral part of each composition.”[FN 50]

These posthumous changes are additionally confirmed in the 1984 Degas in The Art Institute of Chicago catalogue by Richard R. Brettell and Suzanne Folds McCullagh. On page 152, the authors wrote: “Degas’s bronzes resemble the originals in form, but differ considerably in hue, density, and surface quality.”[FN 51]

NOT WITH DEGAS’ FINGERPRINTS

These “considerable differences” are further confirmed in the Joseph S. Czestochowski’s and Anne Pingeot’s 2002 Degas Sculptures, Catalogue Raisonne of the Bronzes catalogue. On page 32 the Musee d’Orsay curator Anne Pingeot wrote: “[Jean] Adhemar [Art Historian] continued: “I asked M. Palazzolo if he would be able to recognize a false Degas bronze. Smiling, he said that he could, because he knew where to find his own fingerprints on the originals.”[FN 52]

Now compare that fact that someone other than Degas’ fingerprints are in these so-called “Degas bronze sculptures” to the Phoenix Art Museum’s 2004 "Degas in Bronze" Press Release. In that Press Release for an exhibit of 73 so-called “Degas sculptures,” the Museum’s director Jim Ballinger is quoted stating: “In fact, Degas’s fingerprints, left behind as he shaped these forms are visable today in many of these bronze sculptures.”[FN 53]

HOW WERE THE BRONZES MADE?

On page 14 of the 2002 Degas Sculptures, Catalogue Raisonne of the Bronzes catalogue, the editor Joseph S. Czestochowski describes how posthumously reproduced wax models were made for casting. The author wrote: “The duplicate wax was then used to cast by cire perdue or lost-wax method a modele or master bronze cast, which was then compared with originals for surface detail and color. The process was repeated with the modele bronze cast being used to make a new gelatin mold that was then used to make other wax casts.”[FN 54]

SURMOULAGES

On page 78 of Ann Dumas and David A. Brenneman’s 2001 Degas and America The Early Collectors catalogue in the article “Degas; The Sculptures” by Hirshhorn Curator of Sculpture Valerie J. Fletcher, the author wrote: “In 1919-20 Hebrard’s founder Albino Palazzolo, made a first set of {Degas} bronzes. -- Those “masters” served to make molds for casting edition of twenty-two bronzes. Technically, all bronzes except the master set are surmoulages.”[FN 55]

WHAT IS A SURMOULAGE?

In the ARTnews November 1974 article "Flagrant Abuses, Pernicious Practices and Counterfeit Sculpture are Widespread," Associate Editor Sylvia Hochfield defines -surmoulage- as: “smaller in scale and of demonstrably diminished definition than the bronze from which it was cast.”[FN 56]

In other words, by avoiding using the hypothetical original mixed-media models for casting in bronze, they have willingly given up the authentic original surface details made by the working fingers of Degas himself. Each time the surface of one of these subjects is approximated by the necessary crude handling of the materials used in the reproduction processes, there is visible change. The resulting pieces may be interesting to look at, but it is an absurdity to pretend they are just the way Degas would have wanted and intended for them to appear.

EDGAR DEGAS NEVER SIGNED HIS SCULPTURE

On the National gallery of Art’s website, it states: “By comparing the sculpture to stylistic changes in Degas' paintings and pastels, we are developing a chronology for the sculpture, which Degas did not date or sign.”[FN 57]

WHAT IS A SIGNATURE?

On page 1387 in the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, the term -signature- is defined as: “A person’s name or mark written by that person or at the person’s direction.”[FN 58]

SO-CALLED DEGAS SIGNATURES POSTHUMOUSLY APPLIED

On page 32-33 of Charles W. Milliard’s 1976 Sculpture of Edgar Degas, the author wrote: “Each cast is stamped with the legend “cire perdue A.A. Herbrard” in relief, and incised with the signature ‘Degas.’”[FN 59]

The posthumous “incision” of this so-called “signature ‘Degas’” to these posthumously reproduced second to third-generation removed bronzes, much less brass, creates the illusion that somehow Edgar Degas either created these so-called bronzes or approve their creation, when in fact he did neither. Edgar Degas was dead at the time and therefore this so-called “signature ‘Degas’” could not have been “written by that person or at the person’s direction.”

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF COUNTERFEIT?

On page 354 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -counterfeit- is defined as: “To forge, copy, or imitate (something) without a right to do so and with the purpose of deceiving or defrauding.”[FN 60]

Was the posthumous “incision” of so-called “Degas” signatures to these posthumously reproduced second to third-generation removed bronzes done “with the purpose of deceiving or defrauding?”

{no photo available}

“DANCER adapted from Edgar Degas' Petite Danseuse de Quatorze Ans, The Baltimore Museum of Art, She stands as only a dancer could stand. Everyone is aware of her special formation from head to toe. Petite Danseuse de Quatorze Ans (Little Dancer of Fourteen Years), 1881 (The Baltimore Museum of Art's cast was made 1919-1921) is the only sculpture Degas chose to exhibit in his lifetime. He created a revolutionary piece by breaking the stereotypical cold inanimate sculptures of his time. He made his dancer come to life. The original, made of bronze and wax mixture, stands 39" tall (The Baltimore Museum of Art's cast is 38" tall) and is dressed in a bodice of yellow silk, a skirt made of gauze, real ballet slippers, and hair made of horsehair, which is tied back with a satin bow.” 754MC Degas Dancer 8," 307MC Degas Dancer 12.5" www.stonemastersstatuary.com/dancer.html

NON-DISCLOSED POSTHUMOUS FAKE

7. BALTIMORE MUSEUM OF ART’S GIFT SHOP

There is a part of the Baltimore Museum of Art that does practice the ethical guidelines that they endorse as members of the Association of Art Museum Directors. It is their Baltimore Museum of Art’s “The BMA Shop.”

On Baltimore Museum of Art’s website, it states: “The BMA Shop carries a wide array of art books, unique gifts, jewelry, posters, reproductions, notecards, and a children's section. BMA members receive a 10% discount on most purchase.”[FN 61]One of these reproductions is the above eight inch high “Dancer” for $45 each.

Obviously, the Baltimore Museum of Art’s museum gift shop has no problem disclosing a reproduction as a -reproduction-. The reasons are made crystal clear in the 2001 AAMD’s Professional Practices in Art Museum booklet.

8. PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES IN ART MUSEUMS

On page 31 of the 2001 AAMD’s Professional Practices in Art Museums booklet, under the title “Reproductions of Works of Art” and documented as “adopted by the membership of the AAMD, January 1979; amended 2001, it states:

“Art museums legitimately generate income through the sale of such educational materials as catalogues, books, postcards, and reproductions. The manufacture and knowledgeable use of reproductions for teaching purposes or in a decorative context is appropriate. However, a proliferation of “art-derived” materials, coupled with misleading marketing of reproductions, has created such widespread confusion as to require clarification in order to maintain professional standards.

“When producing and/or selling reproductions, museums must clearly indicate, through the use of integral markings on the objects, as well as signs, labels, and advertising, that these items are reproductions. Signatures, print edition numbers, and printer’s symbols or titles must not appear in the reproduction if in the original they occur outside the borders of the image. Similarly, signatures, edition numbers, and/or foundry marks on sculpture must not appear on the reproduction.

“Reproductions must be in materials and/or sizes other than those uses by the artist in the original works of art. Although reproductions of decorative arts serving functional purposes may pose special problems in this regard, the fact that they are reproductions should be clearly indicated on the object.

“The touting of exaggerated investment value of reproductions must be avoided because of object or work being offered for purchase is not original and the resale value is highly in doubt.

“When advertising reproductions, museums should not use language implying that there is any identity of quality between the copy and the original or lead the potential buyer to believe that by purchasing any such reproductions, he or she is acquiring an original work of art.”[FN 62]

1,850 DEGAS BRONZE [BRASS] SCULPTURES?

Now compare those prior documented and endorsed Professional Practices in Museums to posthumously application of “signatures,” “edition numbers” and “foundry marks” to this “Little Dancer, Aged Fourteen” and some “1,850"[FN 63] other so-called -Degas bronze sculptures- that are in museums around the world, then you will realize how pervasive and widespread this fraud has been going on since Edgar Degas’ death in 1917.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Section 5 of the FTC Act prohibits “unfair---acts or practices in or affecting commerce.” In part, it states: “A seller’s failure to present complex technical data on his product may lessen a consumer’s ability to choose, for example, but may also reduce the initial price he must pay for the article.---”[FN 64]

Would the “consumer’s ability to choose” be undermined if they were not informed that the so-called Gaston Lachaise, Aristide Maillol, Auguste Rodin and Edgar Degas sculptures being offered for viewing at the price of admission fee per adult, were really no different, quality aside, than the reproductions found in the Baltimore Museum of Art’s gift shop, much less the gift shop located in the Frist Center for the Visual Arts?

WHAT IS FRAUD?

On page 670 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -fraud- is defined as: “a knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment.”[FN 65]

Would a museum that misrepresents a posthumously reproduced second to third-generation removed bronze as a “sculpture” be committing “a knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment?”

CONCLUSION

What needs to be accomplished is the full and honest disclosure of all reproductions as -reproductions- by all museums, auction houses and art dealers. If the Frist Center for the Visual Arts and the Baltimore Museum of Art will give full and honest disclosure for all reproductions as: -reproductions- it would allow museum patrons to give informed consent on whether they wish to attend an exhibit of reproductions, much less pay the price of admission.

But if these objects are not reproductions by definition, direct copies of the artist’s original artwork, but second-generation-removed (or more) -fakes- with or without posthumously applied counterfeit signatures, then serious consequences of law may come into play for those who chose to misrepresent these -fakes- for profit.

The reputations and legacy of living and past artists, present and future museum art patrons and the art-buying public deserve the re-establishment of the obvious; that the living presence and participation of the artist to once again be required, as it always should have been, to create the piece of art attributable to the artist if indeed it is attributed to them, much less purported to have been signed by them.

44. “Let us indicate right away on this subject that he never fixed a precise limit to the number made. The only indication on this point occurs in the text of the donation of 1 April 1916, according to which “notwithstanding the transfer of artistic ownership authorized to the State of M. Rodin, the latter expressly reserves for himself the enjoyment, during his life, of the reproduction rights of those objects given by him, being well understood that the said right of reproduction will remain strictly personal to the donor who is forbidden to cede it for whatever reason to any third party. He will have, in consequence, the right to reproduce and to edit his works and to make impressions or mold for the usage which suits him. In the event that M. Rodin, exercising the right that he has thus reserved, contracts with an art editor for the reproduction in bronze of one or several works included in the present donation, the contract of publication cannot be made for a period of more than five years and the number of reproductions of each work shall not exceed ten.” 1981 Rodin Rediscovered catalogue, ISBN 0-89468-001-3 (pbk.) AACR2

45. page 281 in Jean Chatelain’s “13. An Original in Sculpture” essay published in the National Gallery of Art’s 1981 Rodin Rediscovered catalogue, ISBN 0-89468-001-3 (pbk.) AACR2

46. http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#101

47. Ibid

48. National Gallery of Art’s published 1998 Degas at the Races, ISBN 0-300-07517

62. Published in 2001 by the Association of Art Museum Directors, ISBN 1-880974-02-9

63. “According to various sources (including Durand-Ruel’s June 7, 1919, letter to Cortissoz), the heirs planned an edition of tewnty-five. When the “master” set of bronzes and the lettered set for the heirs and founder are included in the count, twenty-five sets wee indeed cast. Individual works sometime have additional casts, as does the Little Dancer and Dancer Arabesque on Right Leg, Left Arm in Line; see Campell 1995. This brings the total number of bronzes to roughly 1,850.” page 81 NOTES Degas: The Sculptures by Valerie J. Fletcher in the 2001 Ann Dumas & David A. Brenneman’s Degas and America, ISBN: 0-8478-2340-7